Equity Theory in Cross-Cultural Contexts - Essay Example

Equity theory is based on the simple belief that every employee in the organization wants to be treated fairly in relation to others.  Here, the two aspects, i.e. ‘fairness’ and ‘relativity with others’ vary among individuals; these perceptions are greatly influenced by sociocultural aspects to a great extent.  Many management types of research have indicated that managing people in contemporary global organizations that consist of employees from different sociocultural backgrounds has been a great challenge.  Motivational needs vary in different cultures, which makes the managers’ job even more difficult to motivate their people according to what the employees perceive as a source of their motivation.  In such situations, managers can improve their awareness of their people’s motivational needs through better people connections and interpersonal relationships.  Other than the actual motivational needs of every individual, managers can strive to know the extrinsic and intrinsic motivational factors of their people.  In order to establish equity, organizations ensure goals and expectations are set, and reward schemes are made.  All individuals will be rewarded in accordance with these policies and plans, which will cater to extrinsic motivation.  However, managers will have to make an effort to understand the intrinsic motivational factors for their people, which could include simple appreciation, noticing and acknowledging one’s work, spending time with the individual, etc.  At an organizational level, managers dealing with people in different locations and different cultures can modify or initiate new practices that suit the cultural preferences of people.  For example, individual rewards may be applied to people in individualistic cultures, and team-based rewards in collectivistic cultures. 

In your view, does the cross-cultural perspective Bolino and Turnley offer regarding equity theory address this issue satisfactorily? Why or why not?

The cross-cultural perspective offered by Bolino and Turnely (2008) provides a great insight into the different factors individuals regard as inputs and outputs based on their cultures.  Their perspective also explains how societal and national cultures influence individual preferences with respect to their perception of equity.  Although these insights are useful for managers in practical situations, it is not possible to apply them in all situations.  For instance, establishing equity, as perceived by every individual, within a team consisting of people from different cultures is very challenging.  In these cases, people with extrinsic motivational needs such as rewards, pay, and incentives can be satisfied.  Moreover, the same set of practices and policies need to be applied, which may or may not be motivational factors for all members of the team.  As pointed out by Bolino and Turnely (2008), their work does not facilitate interactions between people of different cultures in terms of human resources practices.  Their perspective does not address the possible issues and impact of human resource practices when implemented across borders.  Moreover, this paper does not discuss the multidimensional impact of cultural factors on motivation processes.  Finally, these standpoints do not consider environmental factors such as labor market and costs, legislative and company laws, resources, technology, etc as contributing factors to equity.  For example, a number of leaves entitled to employees in one region may not be considered as referents by employees from other regions; in this case, national and constitutional norms set the expectations of employees, which are adopted as per individual cultural preferences.  Numerous such differences exist in every nation and/or culture, which have not been addressed by Bolino and Turnely.  In conclusion, innumerable cross-cultural perspectives related to equity theory emerge at various situations and times, which would demand extraordinary efforts from managers and a continuous effort to understand their people.